The stats would suggest the William the Conqueror question is the most out of place...Elton John is currently sitting at 83%, compared to Mars' 82% or William the Conqueror's 80%.
Pelandreth: do English schools teach the date the Moors invaded Spain, the Mongols invaded India or the Turks invaded Serbia? The Norman conquest of England is not that relevant in the world scale, and it certainly doesn't merit to be taught abroad.
It is absolutely taught in U.S. schools more than once in the 13 years kids are there. Whether they remember an 11th Century English history date even long enough for a test is another matter.
@rocamorar Schools do teach the dates the Moors invaded Spain, the Mongols invaded India and the Turks invaded Serbia? The Norman conquest of England is relevant in the Western world scale, and it certainly does merit to be taught abroad.
From Germany, they didn't teach us 1066. The Moorish invasion of Spain is at least as relevant as the Norman conquest, no? Destruction of the Visigoth Kingdom, introduction of many technologies, scientific discoveries, crops, and words, to Europe. The crux is that there isn't a single date for it.
I had heard of William the Conquerer but he was never mentioned in my high school in NYC. I only got an idea of who he was when I went to the UK after graduating & made a trip to The London Dungeon.
American here who was definitely taught about the Battle of Hastings in school, along with the date of the defeat of the Spanish Armada, and the date of the signing of the Magna Carta. I can't imagine anyone thinking those dates are unimportant just because they are part of English history. (That was in the 1960s. I have no idea what they are or aren't teaching now except I know they are teaching a form of math that I can't even help my second-grade grandchild do when she has problems with her home work.)
Generally I think most very important historical facts are mostly important in the countries they took place in, and it is hard to assume any event is taught everywhere. We were not told anything about William the Conqueror (or the American civil war for that matter) in my Danish school, and I do not think that is a big deal
I'm 20, American. I was also taught the dates of the Norman conquest and the signing of the Magna Carta in high school. I only remembered the date for the Norman invasion but I do remember what generally happened with the Magna Carta. I was definitely not taught the dates of the Moorish conquest of Iberia, the Mongol invasion of India, or the Ottoman invasion of Serbia. The date for the first at least was probably mentioned in the textbook, but to the same extent that every date is mentioned in the textbook; we weren't expected to know it. We learned about the Ottomans in the Balkans generally but nothing Serbia-specific, and we learned about the Mongols generally but not really about their invasion of India. I do think at my school British history was slightly inflated, but as the successor to a British settler-colony I think that makes sense. I do agree that on the global stage the Norman invasion at least shouldn't be a big priority. Magna Carta is super important, though.
Pop music is probably my weakest category, but after guessing Shatner, Crosby, Croce, Stills, Nash, Diamond, and Young, I went with Smith, Jones, and was in the process of typing Johnson when got it! lololol
"Scandinavia" is not a simple concept. There's the Scandinavian peninsula and that's only Sweden and Norway. Culturally, yes, Denmark too because the language is almost the same as in the other two. But shouldn't you also add Iceland then even though it's further away? And what about Finland? Northern Finland, Finnish Lapland is on the peninsula, but the souther part of the country isn't. And the language, apart from the 5% minority who speaks Swedish is quite different. So - depending on your way of reckoning, it could be 2, 3, 4 or 5 countries. If it's 3, it's usually the three mentioned in the quiz though.
While the Finns reside in Scandinavia, they are ethnically different than Swedes, Danes, and Norwegians. Finns (along with the Estonians) hail from central Asia. The Finns and Estonians migrated to their respective countries way back when,
The Volga valley or Ural mountains were the original location of the Uralic peoples. The Finns and Estonians (probably indistinguishable back then) migrated to their current location more than 5000 years ago.
This is the creation myth for those countries. There is a similar one for Hungary. Languages did work like this, but "peoples" is really not a thing. I can almost guarantee that the people who now call themselves "Finns" won't have more ancestors who came from the Ural Mountains than any other Eastern Europeans. They just happen to speak a similar language. The fact that people identify with groups of people who lived more than 5000 years ago (according to Sulps) is completely illogical and actually quite dangerous, as it leads to jingoism, nationalist separatism and racism. If someone lived 5000 years ago, they are either an ancestor of everyone who is alive today, or no one who is alive today. OK, maybe that's an exaggeration, but it isn't a very big one. The odds of any individual from 5000 years ago being either the ancestor of both of two given people alive today, or the ancestor of neither, are overwhelmingly high.
Fenno-Scandinavia includes Sweden, Norway and Finland. Scandinavia includes Denmark, Norway and Sweden. The Nordics on the other hand includes all the previous countries and Iceland.
Usually "Scandinavia" refers to the cultural-geographical group of Norway, Sweden and Denmark. Because history and stuff. Mostly history makes them really close.
The group that includes Finland and Iceland is just called the Nordic countries or "Norden" (the North). Because they also have stuff with history and culture and stuff... but different.
Please correct me if I'm wrong as there tends to be a fair amount of confusion/freedom when it comes to the term 'Scandinavia'. As far as I know, strictly geographically speaking, Scandinavia refers to Norway and Sweden only. Denmark has Copenhagen basically across from Malmö (Sweden) and is politically and economically linked to Scandinavia. For instance, Scandinavian Airlines (SAS) is the flag carrier of Norway, Sweden and Denmark. Finland has close cultural ties with Norway and particularly Sweden, but the language is a main hint as Finnish is not a Germanic language like the Scandinavian languages. No Finn that I've ever met would categorise themselves as Scandinavian. Iceland does not fall within the geographic Scandinavian term. Having been under both Norwegian and Danish rule at one point and with Icelandic having Germanic roots, it is closely linked to it. The term 'Nordic countries' is used to refer to all five of them: Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Finland and Iceland.
I agree. "Nordic" is the term to use when discussing all five countries. I was ignorant of all these distinctions until I traveled through the region last summer. Every time it came up, it was noted that Sweden, Norway, and Denmark are the Scandinavian countries because of their close linguistic and ethnic relations. The Scandinavian Peninsula itself includes only Sweden and Norway, but Danes are considered Scandinavian as well.
Yeah but there's only one structure called Eiffel (unless there's another obscure one somewhere). So if you write eiffel, you mean the tower. Makes sense to shorten the typing necessary.
Can you put Ares as an alternate for the God of War? That is his Greek name and arguably well known. It will also be easier for people since Wonder Woman just came out.
If one is using the term Scandinavia geographically to mean the Scandinavian peninsula then it would be Norway and Sweden for sure, with Finland almost certainly. If one is using it culturally and including Denmark but excluding Finland, then you definitely have to include Iceland because Iceland was settled by and is culturally derived from Norway and Denmark. If one is using the term to mean those countries with a Scandinavian cross on their flag then Norway Denmark Iceland Finland and Sweden are all included. The point I am trying to make is that however you try and jig it, the answer in the quiz is NEVER going to be correct, however you interpret the question.
It is not something you can make stuff up about.. like denmark shouldnt be in but sweden should because scandinavia starts with an s and d is too far off,. It is not something you can make what you want it to be..
Scandinavian here, and no. Those are the Nordic Countries. Scandinavia is only Denmark, Norway and Sweden. A small part of Finland has territory in the Scandinavian Peninsula, but they are not part of Scandinavia as a region..
The last question doesn't really fit with the description of the quiz. The quiz is fairly easy, but most people won't get all of them correct, especially that last question.
Don't forget that the proto-Finns were actually the first modern settlers of Scandinavia after the ice age.
When Germanic tribes started to migrate further north from the Central Europe, "Finns" had already lived in Norway & Sweden for centuries.
The Volga urheimat theory you are referring to is about Uralic languages, not peoples, so it's somewhat irrelevant here.
The group that includes Finland and Iceland is just called the Nordic countries or "Norden" (the North). Because they also have stuff with history and culture and stuff... but different.
Basically.
they are divorced.